Re: Monty on MySQL 5.1: "Oops, we did it again"

Jason Long wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
> > I wonder if I'm the only one who just saved a copy of that post for
> > reference in case it gets forcibly removed...
> >
> > Recently I was thinking about whether I had enough material to warrant
> > a 2008 update to "Why PostgreSQL instead of MySQL"; who would have
> > guessed that Monty would do most of the research I was considering for
> > me?
> >
> > --
> > * Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
> >
> I quit using MySQL years ago when the default table type did not have
> transactions and subqueries were not existent. The features I was
> looking for were already in PostgreSQL for several versions.
>
> I am surprised to see such an honest post regarding MySQL.

Monty is quite supportive of Postgres.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +